http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programme...ht/3956129.stm

I don't know. It sounds a bit far-fetched to me.

An accustaion to which the answer will be that there is a constitutional right to challenge a voter.

Well - does the list actually exist or is the story made up from the Bush hating rabid media from Great Britian? Their track records mean that I am more inclined to believe the Beeb than Bush's mob. He will just tell me that he has personally seen definte and irefutable proof of the presence of voters of mass destruction in Florida and he is not prepared to sit by idly while .......

If the repugs are targetting a particlar racial minority though, purely on the basis that if they frustrate them they might give up and not vote - sick, sick, sick. Especially when they already know the details of these people and know in advance that they are registered voters. How very different it would be if they were challenging people who they honestly did not believe were correctly registered prior to the election.

<font color=plum>It does sound a bit far-fetched to me also. Don't believe for a moment that the Democrats don't have thier own version of a similar list. The question - of course - is what do the two parties plan to do with these lists of opposing party voters?

Part of the 2000 Florida controversy involved challenges that many of the Democratic votes were ineligible or downright illegal. So I don't doubt that the Repubs plan to challenge votes in the upcoming election....but it would be just plain stupid to do it in an illegal manner when the law actually provides them with the opportunity to challenge votes and voters legally.

As for the "intimidation factor", there are the union bosses who stand outside the voting areas of major metropolitan areas (like Detroit, Chicago, etc) and hand out sheets to the union workers going in. The sheets have the names of the candidates the union workers are being TOLD to vote for. This is not speculation - it has been well documented in all elections in certain towns.

So both sides get equal mileage out of the "intimidation factor".

This story is really nothing more than speculation regarding how the list was generated or what purpose it will be used for. There might well be a perfectly legit explanation for it. Of course, the Beeb might be dead-on too...but it still sounds pretty far-fetched to me.

Guess we'll know more this time next week.</font>

I'll go so far as to say it's a damn lie!! Just like the accusations from the 2000 election in Florida! Does anybody know which counties the accusations came from? Now after you name the counties which party is the supervisor of election from? Which party is charge of running the counties? So now you know the counties and that the supervisor of elections were not Republicans but Democrats and the election volunteers were all drawn from heavy Democrat counties, but some how the Republicans managed to get people inplace, in secret to mess-up minority votes. "Hale" people ask yourselves if the Republicans could get people in positions to mess up the votes, Why in the world wouldn't they get the people in the position to falsify the count? That would be so much easier and less work, less witinesses, no voters turned away to complain, no complants no news Media running with the story. You folks got to remember the Republicans are mean nasty coniving(sp?) conspiring people, if they are going to the trouble to comit voter fraud they aren't going to waste their time on making a few voters "feel" bad. We are going to do it in a big way, not some penny anti BS.

I'm Glad you put "if" in there, the facts are both parties are challenging voters that may not be registered properly, that happens all the time and is the correct thing to do.

Now on to the BS about voter disinfranchisment(sp?) crap, in 2000 there were, what reports of hundereds maybe up to 1,500 supposed incidents. In counties where there is a voter population in the 1,000,000's. 10,000's of voting precencts(sp?) with many poll workers in each one, and handling 100's if 1,000's of voters. Now think about that, do the numbers, we are talking about a miniscule(sp?) percentage. Now instead of these problems being something that is more likely, like a tired poll worker being short tempered with a voter, or not understanding what a voter askes them, or any other of the many NORMAL problems that accur when ever Humans interact with each other in large numbers! No we jump to there must be some kind of cheating going on, some thing under handed.

Lord help us and we are the top of the food chain.

Hale JD - are you honestly sayin the repugs are saintly beyond reproach. Man, I am shocked that you could even think such a thing.

In the words of one of the TV shows that you guys exported to my land - "yer goin straight to hell fer that one" [img]smile.gif[/img] .

No more then if you are trying to say they are evil beyond redemption ;)

Now you tell me is it more likely that there are just plain human errors or a conspriacy that only targets a very small number of a minority? In other words a minority of a minority.

I learned a long time ago if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, place your bet that it is a duck, not an elephant. But I guess there has to be people that will bet it is an elephant so us duck beters get the money, when they payout the winnings. :D

They are evil beyond redemption, even if only in their complicity.

AFLAAAAACK!!!!!!!

Sorry T.L. it just walks like a duck, it quacks like an Insurance co. ;)